THE CONSTITIONAL INTEREST OF THE JUDGE MERCHAN S DECISION
The decision has already influenced the election and American politics for years to come.
It will determine whether in future free and fair elections are possible in future of if the party in power uses its influence over the judiciary to frame and imprison political opponents in order to ensure they win the elections.
Democracy itself is at stake.
The continuation of the rule of law and Constitution is at stake as discussed below.
When the public feels on considering the facts that the presidential candidate and main political opposition to the ruling party has been subjected to political hit job under the cover of a trial by judges and prosecutors allied to that ruling party, and may be imprisoned as part of a highly biased, irregular trial, then it may have consequences.
The Constitution guarantees Americans the right to fair and free elections.
That means the political opposition cannot be convicted and put in prison by courts allied to the ruling party just weeks before the elections or after the elections on the basis of no crime.
If giving about 100,000 USD of his own money to a porn star using an alternative method of payment with the approval and help and perhaps instigation of his account, Michael Cohen, can be a 34 felony count crime, then virtually everything can be a crime that any citizen does.
The Constitution protecting citizens from state overreach and arbitrary arrest and imprisonment has been sidelined.
Rand Paul has said the lawfare against Trump threatens the Constitutional rights of all Americans.
https://www.paul.senate.gov/op_eds/newsmax-op-ed-paul-lawfare-eviscerates-american-judicial-process/
The entanglements of Judge Merchan, his wife and daughter with the Democrat Party raise legitimate suspicion Judge Merchan is misusing his office to eliminate a political opponent under the colour of law.
Yet, Merchan has refused to see a problem with these conflicts of interests and step aside.
The facts show he and his family are involved in conflicts of interests. His conduct of the trial shows irregularities and bias. Yet, he persists in accusing Trump of "innuendo" and "mischaracterization" when Trump brings up these facts.
Trump has a right to a fair trial overseen by judges who do not have similar conflcts of interest. It is being denied to him.
MEDIA BIAS AND A CAMPAIGN OF SLANDER AGAINST TRUMP
Trump is portrayed by the judge and the media funded largely by Soros as "troublesome", "argumentative" when he brings up any of the facts, or valid points suggesting their mendacity or bias as he has a right to do. Trump has a right to a fair trial. He has a right to call out political bias, conflcits of inerest and bias.
There is actually a campaign of defamation against Trump s character going on and Judge Merchan is a part of that campaign of slander and defamation as are media outlets funded by Soros, Gates and allied to the Democrats.
The gag order is another highly questionable and can be seen as part of the same malicious scheme to misuse the law to imprison a political opponent while deceivng the public. The public should not know about the many irregularities in the trial, which encompass the acts of Trumps lawyer.
While media, often funded by mega Dem donors George and Alex Soros, present Judge Merchan as fair and averse to drama, a very different picture emerges when the details of the case are examined. The public has a right to know if a presidential candidate and the main opposition to the Democat Party is being treated fairly and to hearing Trump s side of the case.
Judge Merchan s motive for gagging Trump is clear. Merchan knew he was misusing his office and wanted to avoid exposure. A judge who is confident they really are administering justice impartially does not fear media scrutiny. An honest judge will let the facts talk for themslves.
But a dishonest judge will gag a defendant.
The parallel with the Greek prosecutor probes is clear when an illegal defamation decision was used by Soros and Gates to hide the proofs of their corruption of due process to escape trial in Greece helped by the lawyers Konstantinos Christopoulos and Simos Samaras.
The aim is to mislead the public about the fairness of the proceedings against Trump and to present them as equitable justice when the proceedings, convictions and sentencing are highly irregular and biased by preventing the public from hearing the details also about the Judges conflicts of interests and his families.
MERCHAN S REMOVAL OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY TRUMP FROM THE FILE
Merchan stripped away evidence which Trump presented, according to media.
Merchan himself evaluated the evidence as "tenuous" and irrelevant to justify removing it.
It is not the role of the judge to evalute evidence and remove it before the trial but to present the full evidence for consideration of the jury and legal experts at the trial.
It is not clear what evidence Merchan removed, but the very act of removing evidence is suspicious and a violation of due process.
It may be that vital, key evidence exonerating trump was removed by Merchan.
This can only be done with the complicity of a corrupted lawyer. But that Trump s lawyers may have been corrupted is possible given their many stunning failures including the failure to file an Appeal and file petitions correctly as discussed below.
Trump has the right to present all his evidence fully and completely for consideration.
Again, questions must be asked why his lawyer Blanche allowed the judge to remove evidence/
The parallel with the Greek prosecutor probes is clear where the judges stripped away entire police reports and all the evidence implicating Soros, Gates and Buffett.
Judge Merchan is to rule in September on whether to put Trump, who he has allowed to be covicted as a felon in the most irregular way, hehind bars seven weeks before the election. He has seized to himself illegally the power to put the main political opposition in prison just before the election or just after, at whatever time he choses.
Why has Judge Merchan or Alvin Bragg never asked Trump why he has not filed an Appeal to have the conviction overturned?
How come the judge and Manhattan prosecutor accept it is normal for Trump not to file an Appeal to the conviction?
Is the judge not supposed to be neutral? If he is neutral, why does not ask Trump about his intention to file an Appeal or inform of his right to appeal and the deadlines?
Is it because Mercan and Bragg are conspiring with the corrupted lawyerBlanche to side line any appeal and keep Trump in the dark about his rights by silence and omission?
A FUNDAMTALLY FLAWED CONVICTION
THE LOGICAL AND LEGAL FALLACY BEHIND 34 FELONY COUNTS FOR A SINGLE OVERARCHING ALLEGED FELONY
The alleged offence is a single offence which should carry a single felony conviction.
The alleged offense is composed of many separate actions, specifically of 34 book keeping.
But the individual book keeping entries that make up the offense are not each and every one a separate felony.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division
The conviction for 34 separate felonies for a single offence shows a systematic, flaw and bias in the arguments of the prosecutor and in the Judge overseeing the case.
It is allied to the false reasoning involved in "the fallacy of division when one reasons that something is true for a whole whole must also be true of all or some of its parts."
It shows bias for Alvin Bragg and Judge Merchan to have allowed Trump to be convicted for 34 felonies when they knew or should know that he actually committed one alleged felony made up of 34 separate elements. Taken on their own, each one of the 34 book keeping entries do not represent an offense. They are just book keeping entries like any other and only take on the character of an offense if an overarching scheme to hide 130 K in hush money is involved, and the 34 entries are identified as enabling that scheme.
The alleged offence of paying hush money via false book keeping entries is a single offence which should carry a single felony conviction.
The single alleged offense is composed of many separate actions, specifically of 34 book keeping entries. But these are not 34 separate felony counts.
This failure of basic logic can be seen when we look at the conviction of Bernie Madoff. Madoff was convicted of fraud, money laundering and other related crimes.
He was not convicted for every one of the possibly thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of book keeping entries, which he made to carry out his fraud.
To recap
Bernie Madoff was an American financier who orchestrated the largest Ponzi scheme in history, collecting about $65 billion that he had no intention of investing.
Bernie promised investors high returns in exchange for their investments but their money was not invested. Madoff deposited it into a bank account, which he freely used to fund his lavish lifestyle. Withdrawals were funded out of new deposits, keeping the fraud going for decades.
During the 2008 recession, Madoff could no longer meet the redemption requests. His sons turned him in to the authorities.
Madoff was convicted of fraud, money laundering, and other related crimes, for which he was sentenced to 150 years in federal prison. He died in prison on April 14, 2021, at the age of 82.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bernard-madoff.asp#:~:text=Madoff%20was%20convicted%20of%20fraud,at%20the%20age%20of%2082.
Key takeaway
Trump has committed one alleged felony offence and not 34 offences.
His single alleged offence was composed of multiple book keeping entries similarly to the crimes of Bernie Madoff. He should be convicted for every book keeping entry which form the parts of the single offence.
Another parallel would be if, for example, the offence of burglary. This is broken down into various elements to determine the degree of harm and so the nature of the sentence. But the different elements which belong to burglary like trespass, damaging property by breaking a window, theft etc do not form separate offences. The elements are subsumed under one broad offense called burglary.
SPECULATIONS ABOUT ELECTION INTERFERENCE BASED ON ASSUMPTIONS AND UPHELD BY BIAS
The point is that it was wrong for Judge Merchan and Prosecutor Alvin Bragg to make each part of a single alleged offense a criminal felony.
It is wrong to impute to Trump the motive of influencing the 2016 election and to give this hypothesis the weight of certainty when it is highly speculative. It i based on the thin and contestible claims and untested assumptions.
Trump s hush money scandal may have had no impact on potential voters choices or even boosted his popularity among a large section.
Other motives of Trump might be avoiding personal and public embarrassment for his wife and children and grandchildren.
Trump may have wanted to conceal his involvement in a hush-money payment to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, who threatened before the 2016 election to disclose her story of sex with Mr. Trump for personal reasons, knowing the story would be amplified by the media and his wife and family would be constantly exposed to the story and upset.
But even if Trump were motivated in part to avoid a political scandal, that is no different from the Democrats trying to avoid a political scandals by misleading the public. For example, Democrat VP Tim Walz has been accused of lying about his National Guard record to influence the 2024 election.
The Democrats have been accused of hiding the mental decline of Biden to influence the public.
Winning elections involves influencing the public through countless acts.
There is no reason to believe Trump s singled out hiding the hush money as decisive to winning the 2016 election or for supposing it was decisive, or even marginally important with voters.
What makes the case significant is that Trump is the main political opposition to the Democrat Party whose mega donors include George and Alex Soros.
Judge Merchan and the Democrats have tried to present this extraordinary irregular application fo the law to target Trump as the fair and equitable application of the law. Trump, they claim, has been treated like anyone else.
However, even former NY Governor Andrew Cuomo has said that if the charges had not involved Trump, the prosecution would have come to nothing.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4734858-andrew-cuomo-donald-trump-alvin-bragg-hush-money-case-new-york/
Cuomo, in an interview Friday on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” argued that the case should have “never” been brought forward.
“If his name was not Donald Trump and if he wasn’t running for president … I’m the former AG of in New York, [and] I’m telling you that case would’ve never been brought.”
“That’s what is offensive to people, and it should be because if there’s anything left, it’s belief in the justice system,” he added.
This is the view of a Democrat and the former Attorney General of New York.
DOCUMENTED ENTANGLEMENTS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OF JUDGE MERCHAN
All the prosecutors and judges are linked in one way or another to the Democrat Party.
Judge Merchan s wife Lara worked in the office of the NY AG Letitia James for three years.
His daughter works for a company raising money for Democrat election candidates.
He gave a donation to the Democrats albeit small.
Small though the sum may have been, it telegraphed his allegiance.
Yet, to bring up these conflicts of interest is to be a "conspiracy theorist" "argumentative" "troublesome" according to those accused of conflicts of interests.
How objective can those accused of conflicts of interests be expected to be in assessing those conflicts?
They cannot be expected to be objective which is why a fair trial includes a right to a trial before a court and judge without similar conflicts of interests. This has so far been denied to Trump.
The timing of the lawfare is significant because the prosecution, conviction and sentencing have all accelerated when Trump declared he was running for president and as the November elections approach.
The plan to sentence Trump to prison on September 18th 2024 just six weeks before the election represents an attempt to overthrow democracy in the USA by
a) defamation and slander of a candidate (Alex Soros said Democrats should refer to him as a "convicted felon" at every opportunity)
b) physical imprisonment of Trump, meaning that he cannot take part in election activities
Because the facility is controlled by the same network engaged in mendaciously putting him in prison to win the election, his safety cannot be assured. The motive of malice is established. Inside prison, Trump could be killed with his murder reframed as sickness, the random assault of another prisoner etc.
THE POTENTIAL BRIBERY OF OF TRUMP S LEGAL TEAM?
FAILURE TO FILE AN APPEAL?
More than three months have passed since a jury convicted trump of 34 felony couns of falsifying records to cover up the transfer of his own money to a Porn star and yet no appeal appears to have been filed by his lawyer, Todd Blanche or his team.
At least, I could find no evidence that an appeal to the ruling had been filed when searching the internet from Greece.
Moreover, there is plainly no regular Appeals trial scheduled. This would suggest that there was, indeed, no regular Appeal filed to contest the decsion.
The proceedins have moved from the decision, from the conviction in the court of Judge Merchan in May to the sentencing by Judge Merchan scheduled for the 18th September 2024.
Filing an appeal to a ruling and appealing a ruling is a standard practise when there are significant gaps in the evidence and arguments.
It was and is especially important to file an appeal in such a landmark case with so many irregularities with such huge political implications.
Yet, it appears, as far I can see, that no Appeal was filed and there is no Appeals trial.
The original conviction has to be overturned. This can be done in an Appeal.
Trump s record as a felon has to be expunged.
The focus should have been from the very beginning on filing an Appeal.
Instead the focus has been on delaying the sentencing.
This is perplexing when it was within the power of Trump to file an appeal and overturn the conviction and so avert sentencing altogether.
Blanche as a lawyer must know that he following a path which harms Trump. Has he informed Trump of his options? Has he advised Trump to file an Appeal and did Trump reject it? It is not clear why Trump would have a motive to reject filing an Appeal as it is the obvious way to overturn the conviction and delay the sentencing if not stop it altogether.
It is more likely that Trump was not given proper legal advice by his team led by Blanche. It is more likely they deliberately hid from him the obvious legal path of filing an Appeal and, if necessary, going to the Supreme Court in the final intance.
If the Appeal had been filed and had been rejected, Trump could have gone to the Supreme Court for a final decision.
The focus on delaying the setencing flowing from the decision of the first instance court is the worst option for Trump and may end up in disaster, in his imprisonment.
Yet, it turns out to be the one chosen by his legal team.
Todd Blanche may have falsely implied or suggested to Trump the decision of the first court was the final decision and Trump had to accept the convtion and sentencing.
What about Republican Speaker Mike Johnson, a lawyer from Louisiana, who, in many ways, is on the opposite political spectrum of Trump, and who attended many of the court sesssions. Why did he not advise Trump about the need for an Appeal? Or warn him of the weakness of the presentation of his team?
Stopping an appeal from being filed and corrupting lawyers is a part of a system of corruption run by Alex and George Soros and their associates Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett.
FAILURE TO FILE A KEY PETITION TO MOVE THE CASE TO A FEDERAL COURT CORRECTLY
In addition to failing to file a regular Appeal to overturn the conviction, the lawyer Todd Blanche did not file a petition to move the case to a federal court as he was tasked with doing.
Media state that the judge rejected the request to change the courts on the grounds hat no request had been filed. How is this possible? Hw can a lawyer prepare a request, go to a court and still fail to file the request properly using the right forms?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/prosecutors-balk-trumps-bid-delay-post-conviction-hush-113354102
Has Todd Blanche told Trump he has the right to appeal the sentencing? What the best strategy is? And will he file the appeal to the sentence using the right forms or fail to do so meaning that Trump s appeal of his sentence is de facto annulled, cancelled by Blanche s incompetence and or corruption and the sentencing stands?
There is no explanation for why Todd Blanche and his team of lawyers failed to file a request correctly with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at the end of August. Trump to move the case to a federal courtourt other than that they have been bribed to throw the case.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4856639-donald-trump-new-york-hush-money-federal-court-request-rejected/
Filing requests correctly, classifying the type of legal action correctly,F presenting the right evidence, the right legal strategy, making appeals should be the bread and butter of a lawyer s work.
FAILURE TO USE THE RIGHT ARGUMENTS TO MOVE THE CASE TO THE SUPREME COURT
In a four-page ruling, Judge Alvin Hellerstein rightly wrote that nothing about the high court's July 1 ruling affected his previous conclusion that hush money payments at issue in Trump’s case “were private, unofficial acts, outside the bounds of executive authority.”
When the Supreme Court clarified the conditions for immunity clear in a ruling on July 1st 2024
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4730279-supreme-court-immunity-trump-case/
and when it is plain that Trump s hush money case did not meet those conditions, that it does involve personal and unofficial acts not given immunity, then why did Blanche use that argument of personal anf unofficial acts to ask for immunity, and not the far stronger arguments of massive Constitutional interest, specifically of the corruption and political motivation of the trials?
If Judge Hellerstein refuses to consider evidence of massive corruption, he exposes himself to criminal charges. Why does Blanche not make that clear to Hellerstein? Failures of the judges to uphold the law must have consequences.
If a lawyer cannot do these basic things, then they should never have been admitted to the bar and they should be barred from practising if they have been.
It takes a positive decision for a lawyer not to do the things that belong to his or her standard practise.
FAILURE TO CHALLENGE THE GAG ORDER OR MAKE EMERGENCY, EXPEDITED REQUESTS
There are options to make emergency requests which have not been fully exploited.
Failing to file requests, appeals, submit evidence, present the right legal strategy, are all ways for corrupted lawyers to secretly ensure their clients are convicted while appearing to be doing things that help them to retain their trust.
Precisely failure and omission is how to charatize Todd Blanche acts. It is not one isolated failure or random mistake. It is a pattern of failures and omissions which all serve to put Trump in jeopardy.
The Constitutional case turns on whether the official political opposition can be put in prison before an election using such a biased, partisaned and irregular approach. It does not turn on whether Trump had immunity under office especially as the acts concern personal and unofficial acts which do not enjoy immunity according to a recent Supreme Court ruling.
Todd Blance is, incidentally, also a former prosecutor who worked in the same NY AG s office and was a life long Democrat until he took up the case of Trump.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL INTEREST
IS AMERICA A POLICE STATE OR GOVERNMENT BY THE RULE OF LAW AND CONSTITUTION?
No comments:
Post a Comment